sks-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Sks-devel] [GnuPG-users] sks-keyservers.net: Changes to pools / SRV


From: Kristian Fiskerstrand
Subject: Re: [Sks-devel] [GnuPG-users] sks-keyservers.net: Changes to pools / SRV Weights
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 15:37:11 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 2012-05-13 15:29, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> 
> On May 13, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> Putting a band-aid on an issue isn't the best engineering, nor is
> reverse proxy necessarily the "best" engineering solution even if
> adding a reverse proxy is relatively simple, it isn't necessarily
> the only solution, just what "works".

Indeed, but complexity goes both ways. Rewriting the SKS code-base to
multi-thread will most certainly (i) take time (ii) result in some
breakage while figuring out all the bugs.

A reverse proxy in front is a simple quick-fix that, if not solve the
full problem, reduce the problem of un-responsive servers to the
users. (Hence they are given extra weight)

> 
>> * (as an aside, I've added apache2 to the test now, in addition
>> to nginx)
>> 
> 
> My apache2 reverse proxy thanks you for the SRV weight boost ;-)
> 

Incidentally, which server is that? Would be nice to see in the pool
for testing. But in the pool atm I only see these HTTP Server responses
    [1] => nginx
    [2] => sks_www/1.1.4
    [3] => sks_www/1.0.10
    [4] => sks_www/1.1.1
    [5] => nginx/1.2.0
    [6] => nginx/0.6.35
    [7] => sks_www/1.1.2
    [8] => sks_www/1.1.3
    [9] => nginx/1.0.15
    [10] => nginx/0.7.67
    [11] => sks_www/1.0.9
    [12] => nginx/1.1.19
    [13] => nginx/1.0.12
    [14] => nginx/1.0.14
    [15] => apache2 rev proxy (like nginx :P)
    [16] => sks_www/1.1.0


> More seriously: adding a bias through an attribute like Uses
> reverse proxy? might be useful considering the recent
> implementation/adoption. As time moves on, there are surely other
> attributes of interest. Consider Has IPv6? after a few more IPv6
> days for example.
> 

I'll take that into consideration :)

- -- 
- ----------------------------
Kristian Fiskerstrand
http://www.sumptuouscapital.com
Twitter: @krifisk
- ----------------------------
Corruptissima re publica plurimæ leges
The greater the degeneration of the republic, the more of its laws
- ----------------------------
This email was digitally signed using the OpenPGP
standard. If you want to read more about this
The book: Sending Emails - The Safe Way: An
introduction to OpenPGP security is now
available in both Amazon Kindle and Paperback
format at
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B006RSG1S4/
- ----------------------------
Public PGP key 0xE3EDFAE3 at http://www.sumptuouscapital.com/pgp/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=d5nu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]